Ludlow-Taylor getting a new a new Principal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ha, I remember in one of the older L-T threads there was a parent who was sure her child wouldn't fit in at Ludlow Taylor because she had her own Mac and they lived in an $800,000 house. I think she also played the violin. It's hilarious to me that all these sheep refuse to send their kids to a decent school down the street because none of the other fancy parents are doing it.

Fancy parents? Ooh la la. Do I count, because my house ran us 800K and I take vacations abroad?

If the school wants to serve our neighborhood (far from clear) more than others, time to get used to those awful elitist neighborhood parents.

BTW, it's not a decent school by the standards of most neighborhood parents, or they'd be the majority, at least in the lower grades.

does anyone in DC really think owning an $800K house is any kind of big deal? It means absolutely nothing in terms of wealth for this area and relatively speaking it doesn't merit the kind of pretention PP expressed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ha, I remember in one of the older L-T threads there was a parent who was sure her child wouldn't fit in at Ludlow Taylor because she had her own Mac and they lived in an $800,000 house. I think she also played the violin. It's hilarious to me that all these sheep refuse to send their kids to a decent school down the street because none of the other fancy parents are doing it.

Fancy parents? Ooh la la. Do I count, because my house ran us 800K and I take vacations abroad?

If the school wants to serve our neighborhood (far from clear) more than others, time to get used to those awful elitist neighborhood parents.

BTW, it's not a decent school by the standards of most neighborhood parents, or they'd be the majority, at least in the lower grades.

The elitism isn't in the home value or the hobbies -- it's in thinking a difference in home value & hobbies somehow makes LT a bad fit for your child.

And to me, the question isn't so much whether the neighborhood parents think it's a decent school (some do, some don't) -- it's the criteria they're using. LT is consistently portrayed as inferior to Maury, despite having considerably more kids performing at an advanced level. If you suspect (as I do) that's because Maury has more white kids, then you might fault the portrayer & not the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ha, I remember in one of the older L-T threads there was a parent who was sure her child wouldn't fit in at Ludlow Taylor because she had her own Mac and they lived in an $800,000 house. I think she also played the violin. It's hilarious to me that all these sheep refuse to send their kids to a decent school down the street because none of the other fancy parents are doing it.

Fancy parents? Ooh la la. Do I count, because my house ran us 800K and I take vacations abroad?

If the school wants to serve our neighborhood (far from clear) more than others, time to get used to those awful elitist neighborhood parents.

BTW, it's not a decent school by the standards of most neighborhood parents, or they'd be the majority, at least in the lower grades.

Neighborhood parents had it in for Cobbs and they didn't like how black it is. That's why they didn't send or keep their kids there. Scores are good and the school is decent.

[Anonymous]

And so we are back to post #1, now that Cobbs is gone, what will happen next?

On the "Dump the Cluster" thread, someone said some folks are already ditching Watkins for L-T.

[Anonymous]

And to me, the question isn't so much whether the neighborhood parents think it's a decent school (some do, some don't) -- it's the criteria they're using. LT is consistently portrayed as inferior to Maury, despite having considerably more kids performing at an advanced level. If you suspect (as I do) that's because Maury has more white kids, then you might fault the portrayer & not the school.

Maury has far more high SES students (translation: neighborhood kids) in the pipeline for the testing grades than LT, not just more white kids. This means that we're going to see more kids performing at an advanced level at Maury than LT within another two or three years. Since this is a no brainer, your insistence that L-T is the better school motivates me to fault the portrayer and not the pps complaining that LT lags behind Maury....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And so we are back to post #1, now that Cobbs is gone, what will happen next?

On the "Dump the Cluster" thread, someone said some folks are already ditching Watkins for L-T.

I heard your principal makes a good, welcoming first impression.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And to me, the question isn't so much whether the neighborhood parents think it's a decent school (some do, some don't) -- it's the criteria they're using. LT is consistently portrayed as inferior to Maury, despite having considerably more kids performing at an advanced level. If you suspect (as I do) that's because Maury has more white kids, then you might fault the portrayer & not the school.

Maury has far more high SES students (translation: neighborhood kids) in the pipeline for the testing grades than LT, not just more white kids. This means that we're going to see more kids performing at an advanced level at Maury than LT within another two or three years. Since this is a no brainer, your insistence that L-T is the better school motivates me to fault the portrayer and not the pps complaining that LT lags behind Maury....

But LT *already* has better scores, without the high-SES kids you seem to think are necessary to achieve that. What school is better, the one that's able to teach the kids they have, or the one that's counting on high-SES kids (presumed to be better prepared) to get its scores up?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And to me, the question isn't so much whether the neighborhood parents think it's a decent school (some do, some don't) -- it's the criteria they're using. LT is consistently portrayed as inferior to Maury, despite having considerably more kids performing at an advanced level. If you suspect (as I do) that's because Maury has more white kids, then you might fault the portrayer & not the school.

Maury has far more high SES students (translation: neighborhood kids) in the pipeline for the testing grades than LT, not just more white kids. This means that we're going to see more kids performing at an advanced level at Maury than LT within another two or three years. Since this is a no brainer, your insistence that L-T is the better school motivates me to fault the portrayer and not the pps complaining that LT lags behind Maury....

But LT *already* has better scores, without the high-SES kids you seem to think are necessary to achieve that. What school is better, the one that's able to teach the kids they have, or the one that's counting on high-SES kids (presumed to be better prepared) to get its scores up?

+1000. Was just about to make the same point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

But LT *already* has better scores, without the high-SES kids you seem to think are necessary to achieve that. What school is better, the one that's able to teach the kids they have, or the one that's counting on high-SES kids (presumed to be better prepared) to get its scores up?

In a city with neighborhood schools, the better school is the school that serves the neighborhood better. Maury now draws in the majority of young children from the geographical area it serves while LT is years away from doing so, if it ever does. Maury isn't counting on high-SES kids to raise test scores, it's mainly serving the children who live within walking distance of the school, whatever their situations.

Please, high SES kids aren't "presumed" to be better prepared than low SES kids collectively, they are because they're taught far more outside the classroom than inside. If you doubt this, look at the test scores for Watkins students broken down by subgroup. The gap between the scores of the Watkins white kids, AA kids and FARMs kids is a shocker when you consier that many of the kids being tested have had the very same teachers since age 3. A film maker should do a documentary on what causes the disparities at Watkins.

[Anonymous]

It's ridiculous circular logic. People don't think it's a good school because the neighbors don't send the kids, and the neighbors don't send the kids because they don't think it's a good school. IB parents won't send their kids until other IB parents send their kids first. And so far, the IB parents who HAVE sent their kids are mocked and called hippies who are bad parents for letting their kids be guinea pigs. It's pretty hateful.

I had hoped that having a new principal would help calm the anti-LT rhetoric but that remains to be seen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But LT *already* has better scores, without the high-SES kids you seem to think are necessary to achieve that. What school is better, the one that's able to teach the kids they have, or the one that's counting on high-SES kids (presumed to be better prepared) to get its scores up?

In a city with neighborhood schools, the better school is the school that serves the neighborhood better. Maury now draws in the majority of young children from the geographical area it serves while LT is years away from doing so, if it ever does. Maury isn't counting on high-SES kids to raise test scores, it's mainly serving the children who live within walking distance of the school, whatever their situations.

Please, high SES kids aren't "presumed" to be better prepared than low SES kids collectively, they are because they're taught far more outside the classroom than inside. If you doubt this, look at the test scores for Watkins students broken down by subgroup. The gap between the scores of the Watkins white kids, AA kids and FARMs kids is a shocker when you consier that many of the kids being tested have had the very same teachers since age 3. A film maker should do a documentary on what causes the disparities at Watkins.

I think one could do a film at Watkins on a number of topics ......, including bizarre safety issues. Not sure how many of those "white kids" are left, but IB percentages appear to be dwindling. Maybe the new first graders will bring back the IB percentages. But I don't see the people in charge settling for 4 classes IB when they should get funded for 5. Time will tell. Hope I'm wrong.

But I also think L-T is going to flip to being a neighborhood school more quickly that you may predict. When it does, a lot of those "white kids" IB to L-T will jump ship to L-T in droves. Fair weather friends to Watkins.... I still don't get it with L-T - only 2 classes per grade at L-T and yet the 'hood shuns it for Watkins. The L-T 'hood could "take over" L-T instantaneously if they decided to do just that.

What you wrote that I bolded above is right on, IMO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In a city with neighborhood schools, the better school is the school that serves the neighborhood better.

See, I'm the poster who said earlier that I don't give a damn about neighborhood schools; for me academics is all (well, that's an exaggeration; safety is up there). IB percentage counts for approximately zilch.

If you went through the DCPS school profiles and listed all the elementary schools in order of IB percentage, you'd find a lot of schools with a much higher IB percentage than LT that I would never send my kid to -- because the academic performance is truly awful.

[Anonymous]

http://dcps.dc.gov/DCPS/About+DCPS/Press+Releases+and+Announcements/Press+Releases/DCPS+Students+Continue+to+Demonstrate+Growth

School Level DC CAS Highlights
Eleven schools, representing nearly all wards in the city, made double-digit gains in math. These schools are Amidon-Bowen Elementary School (10.4), Capitol Hill Montessori (12.9), Drew Elementary School (34.0), Ketcham Elementary School (11.3), Kimball Elementary School (10.6), Ludlow-Taylor Elementary School (15.3), Raymond Education Campus (15.3), Ross Elementary School (13.3), SWW@FS (11.0), Truesdell (14.2) and Whittier Education Campus. (13.3).

Yeah, L-T!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And to me, the question isn't so much whether the neighborhood parents think it's a decent school (some do, some don't) -- it's the criteria they're using. LT is consistently portrayed as inferior to Maury, despite having considerably more kids performing at an advanced level. If you suspect (as I do) that's because Maury has more white kids, then you might fault the portrayer & not the school.

Maury has far more high SES students (translation: neighborhood kids) in the pipeline for the testing grades than LT, not just more white kids. This means that we're going to see more kids performing at an advanced level at Maury than LT within another two or three years. Since this is a no brainer, your insistence that L-T is the better school motivates me to fault the portrayer and not the pps complaining that LT lags behind Maury....

But LT *already* has better scores, without the high-SES kids you seem to think are necessary to achieve that. What school is better, the one that's able to teach the kids they have, or the one that's counting on high-SES kids (presumed to be better prepared) to get its scores up?

YES +1,000!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
http://dcps.dc.gov/DCPS/About+DCPS/Press+Releases+and+Announcements/Press+Releases/DCPS+Students+Continue+to+Demonstrate+Growth

School Level DC CAS Highlights
Eleven schools, representing nearly all wards in the city, made double-digit gains in math. These schools are Amidon-Bowen Elementary School (10.4), Capitol Hill Montessori (12.9), Drew Elementary School (34.0), Ketcham Elementary School (11.3), Kimball Elementary School (10.6), Ludlow-Taylor Elementary School (15.3), Raymond Education Campus (15.3), Ross Elementary School (13.3), SWW@FS (11.0), Truesdell (14.2) and Whittier Education Campus. (13.3).

Yeah, L-T!!!

Ludlow-Taylor posted a 15.4% increase in math scores. Was the principal there really that bad? Shouldn't people be congratulating her now? Seems like this is a pretty good school after all.